A Religious Dialogue

The Modal View

On the other hand, the modal view is of the opinion that the three forms of God are not equal and thus, do not externally coexist with one another . The has the implication that the moralities view God as three forms of manifestation, and are of the opinion that the trinity is a reflection of his three temporary activities . This essay will subsequently use a dialogue representation to reflect the views of the three subjects as highlighted above to highlight their different views about the nature of God.

The Modalist vs. the Nicene Defender

Arius: “A Father and his Son cannot be under the same subclass. I tell them every day that both a father and his son cannot exist together simultaneously, and have the same power….how can a subject have similar powers to the master? The master will always be king and the subject will always be subdued”. Nicene defender, “No one should dispute the contents of the Apostle’s creed. Divine beings are homoousious in nature. How then can God and the Son not be? The Greek gods and goddesses too were…similar in nature and begotten of one substance.”

Arius: “if that was the case, then why was Christ sent to work on earth as his father sat high in the throne?”; Modalist, “I totally second you, in fact, am of the view that there are not three beings here.. All these three some is not an accurate thesis…However, I am only aware of one being. Just one…whoever brought about this threesome topic should really expound on the subject matter.

Nicene defender, “Well, the idea is that there is one God, one that takes up three forms. The most important being the father and the son. The father and the son are uncreated beings that have the same essence and substance, meaning that they are one in unison . Arius, “if that is the case, why is it that the son was subdued to the father?”.Nicene, “Well that is true, but does not rule out the homoousious nature of the two”.

Arius “Divinity does not warrant the infinite nature of a being….the father and the son differ in this sense…the father is infinite while the son and the Holy Spirit are not. This is akin to purporting that while the father has no beginning, and that his establishment time cannot be established, the son has a definite beginning, he was formed and born and he is begotten and thus not part of the unbegotten. Modalist, “We tend to take things very literary.

Theism vs. the Modalist View

However, the spiritual realm does not operate as we like it to be. In regards to the theism perspective, the thing is this. God is divine. This means that he has the ability to subdivide his roles or either partakes of a role that he chooses to and when he chooses to. In this case, therefore, he is able to redeem by taking up one of the three successive roles of acting as the father, the son or the Holy Spirit.

The ability of God to act in this way has nothing to do with his God head nature. In any case, these are terms that the father could bear or choose to uphold but have no relationship whatsoever with the inner being of his nature.” Arius “I wonder why all of you seem to rotate around my view and not consent to it. Just as I said, the three beings are truly distinct. While the father was fully God, the son assumed the role of the leader and the sprit was subdued to the son. While the Modalist does not want to fully admit the position of the father as the God head, I wonder how it is possible for the father to assume all the three roles designated to him, if he is not the head of them all.

Nicene “The theism view about God is long overdue. This is a debate that ought to be settled after the second council meeting held in Constantinople, in the period 381.An affirmation of the first council view. One that proved the divine nature of Jesus, not created and yet divine. It also accepted the full divine nature of the Holy Spirit, a conclusion derived from an assimilation and complete understanding of the scriptures.

Therefore, It is ultimate proof that God is one, and one that is not human or of created nature. His son, Jesus Christ is also God…reflects all the nature and character of his father. He is God, Light and True God just as is his father, he was begotten and not created or made and of the similar substance composition as his father . In any case, how can the father be of a different likelihood from his child….this signifies that he is of substance, just as that of this Father.

Therefore, this means that, whatever God is, his son too is…all of similar nature. Modality.: “It is quite difficult to explain the co-inherence nature of God and the divine persons that are associated with the trinity…while we all admit to the existence of the trinity, it is rather dumbfounding that we seem not to agree that the supreme being is their father, who is actually one being acting in place of three”

Conclusion

Modalism and theism came into being through a desire to express the truth of Gods revelation as a being. However, both aspects seem to describe these revelations to an extreme nature, making both the perspectives highly unbalanced. While modality admits that there is really one God, theism admits that there is a unique God that seems to take up a three in one nature. However, the abundance of truth lies in the Nicaean view.

Just as the famous saying goes, like father like son. This means that whatever character and traits that the father depicts, the son also depicts. Therefore, all are of the same essence, substance and nature. The son depicts the likeness of his father as being the light, true God and God.